Top Law Schools

I've got 3 core classes which are Crim, K, and Civ Pro.

I don't have too many problems with the first 2 classes. Whatever I miss is often filled in by outlines and supplements. But Civ Pro is killing me. Seems to me I don't get everything going on in class. Today, we went over JNOV(recap) and motions for new trials. The former I didn't get at all until I read some supplements on the side, but I was completely lost on the subject until I read about it last night. I'll probably need to look through it tonight before going to bed.

Is this normal? Is it typical to have one class where you're completely lost? It was like this with contracts in the beginning--I didn't know what the hell was going on for the first 5 weeks. Spent hours reading/rereading parts and reading Chirelstein for the basic cases everyone reads during those weeks. Now it's all coming together.

Am I just dumb?

I feel the same way actually (about civ pro anyway). I recommend going to practice problems from old exams (except the jurisdiction question, obviously) and from CALI... that's been fairly useful so far. Doing practice problems reveals all the little wrinkles and nuances that you don't notice until you are stumped.

Nah man, law school is a struggle for everyone at some point. As long as you are eventually pulling it all together, you will be fine. No reason to worry/panic if you aren't understanding something midway through the semester, especially if it's a topic you recently started.

Don't sweat it man. I felt lost in Civ Pro on numerous occasions and I still managed to get A's in both semesters of Civ Pro. What worked for me in that class was keeping kind of a "big picture" approach looking at a lawsuit from beginning to end (filings, discovery, pre-trial motions, post-trial motions, appeals). Looking at things this way really helped me grasp the concepts.

Also, I don't know how big of a fan you are on supplements but one that REALLY helped me (and which seems to help most others that I talk to) is "Acing Civ Pro" (http://www.amazon.com/Acing-Civil-Proce ... 403&sr=8-1).

Just keep up with the readings and trying to put things together. It will start to come together (for me it was the week before finals). Isn't that when you want everything to come together though?

Never felt like I knew what was going on in K's, and booked the class. The truth is you don't know where you stand until you get your exam back. Just go w/ it...

Thanks, guys.

I'm going to relax my nerves with a cup of tea, a pastry, and some TV before I hit the books again. You guys rock.

I cannot begin to tell you how awesome the E&E is for Civ Pro.

kalvano wrote:I cannot begin to tell you how awesome the E&E is for Civ Pro.

Agreed. It explains SJ pretty well.

You're probably exactly where you should be. It's the people that think they understand everything that are probably in trouble. I had to keep reminding myself that I wasn't suppose to completely understand something the first time we went over it in class.

did you try talking to Prof L?

dude, you should have my prof! She just reads powerpoint slides to us. Freaking useless!! I'd say half the questions the students ask her is met with "I'll have to get back to you on that". Anyway, don't think you're without hope just b/c you're lost in civpro. There's an entire class in the same boat over here. Oddly enough, I think I did better on the civpro midterm than the others. I just worked a lot of old exams.

now, 2-207 in contracts...whew!

Get Glannon.

studebaker07 wrote:Don't sweat it man. I felt lost in Civ Pro on numerous occasions and I still managed to get A's in both semesters of Civ Pro. What worked for me in that class was keeping kind of a "big picture" approach looking at a lawsuit from beginning to end (filings, discovery, pre-trial motions, post-trial motions, appeals). Looking at things this way really helped me grasp the concepts.

Also, I don't know how big of a fan you are on supplements but one that REALLY helped me (and which seems to help most others that I talk to) is "Acing Civ Pro" (http://www.amazon.com/Acing-Civil-Proce ... 403&sr=8-1).

Just keep up with the readings and trying to put things together. It will start to come together (for me it was the week before finals). Isn't that when you want everything to come together though?

That book is win. And I hate CivPro.

booyakasha wrote:Get Glannon.

This is the only credited response.

Yeah, you're too stupid for law school.

studebaker07 wrote:Don't sweat it man. I felt lost in Civ Pro on numerous occasions and I still managed to get A's in both semesters of Civ Pro. What worked for me in that class was keeping kind of a "big picture" approach looking at a lawsuit from beginning to end (filings, discovery, pre-trial motions, post-trial motions, appeals). Looking at things this way really helped me grasp the concepts.

Also, I don't know how big of a fan you are on supplements but one that REALLY helped me (and which seems to help most others that I talk to) is "Acing Civ Pro" (http://www.amazon.com/Acing-Civil-Proce ... 403&sr=8-1).

Just keep up with the readings and trying to put things together. It will start to come together (for me it was the week before finals). Isn't that when you want everything to come together though?

Acing is a couple of years old (2008). Make sure to check the filing dates, they changed in 2010. Also Rule 15 - Amendments changed substantially from the way it is described in the book. This is a problem with Civ Pro supplements, things change more than in other topics. Also it does not discuss Iqbal in Pleadings...

For a very easy read on Civ Pro I recommend this supplement:

Inside Civil Procedure: What Matters and Why (Inside Series)
# Paperback: 320 pages
# Publisher: (Aspen) Wolters Kluwer Law & Business (August 19, 2009)
# Language: English
# ISBN-10: 0735564086
# ISBN-13: 978-0735564084

A concise and student-friendly study guide, Inside Civil Procedure: What Matters and Why helps students to become more engaged in the course by offering clear explanations that demystify the material without oversimplifying it. It also offers explicit pedagogical features that include graphics, Sidebars, and Frequently Asked Questions, among others, to guide comprehension and reinforce learning. Along with an attractive two-color page design, Inside Civil Procedure: What Matters and Why features: clear explanations of each major topic in Civil Procedure dynamic pedagogical elements that enhance learning and facilitate use...

The Glannon-written E&E is well-known, but Glannon has another book out, "The Glannon Guide to Civil Procedure", which is easier to read and more straightforward. It helped me a lot with Civ Pro and I highly recommend it.

vanwinkle wrote:The Glannon-written E&E is well-known, but Glannon has another book out, "The Glannon Guide to Civil Procedure", which is easier to read and more straightforward. It helped me a lot with Civ Pro and I highly recommend it.

Yo, ban MTal.

All he ever posts is crap like 2 posts up

vanwinkle wrote:The Glannon-written E&E is well-known, but Glannon has another book out, "The Glannon Guide to Civil Procedure", which is easier to read and more straightforward. It helped me a lot with Civ Pro and I highly recommend it.

Is it necessary if I already have the E&E and use the hell out of it?

M.M. wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:The Glannon-written E&E is well-known, but Glannon has another book out, "The Glannon Guide to Civil Procedure", which is easier to read and more straightforward. It helped me a lot with Civ Pro and I highly recommend it.

Yo, ban MTal.

All he ever posts is crap like 2 posts up

+1,000

kalvano wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:The Glannon-written E&E is well-known, but Glannon has another book out, "The Glannon Guide to Civil Procedure", which is easier to read and more straightforward. It helped me a lot with Civ Pro and I highly recommend it.

Is it necessary if I already have the E&E and use the hell out of it?

I have both and they both help me equally I would say. I recommend getting the other book as well.

I think that feeling lost (to a moderate degree, not completely fucked) is good. It means that you recognize the ambiguity that's inherent in some of the subject material. I would be more concerned if everything made sense and I thought I always knew the answer. That would probably mean I that I had a superficial understanding of the concept and was missing the nuances. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not that smart, it's waaaaaaay more likely that I screwed up somewhere rather than I'm just a natural law genius.

If you're having problems with CivPro, try to visualize the case problem from beginning to end in your head. I think of CivPro as like a set of those Russian dolls. It's a series of increasingly smaller areas in the same general field from Personal Jurisdiction -> Subject matter->venue->Dismissal->Discovery->Summary judgment (JMOL)->Verdict/JNOV. Think of it as the rules to monopoly or a board game that you're playing. Only in the most extreme situations do you have intervention outside of the normal rules, so it is impossible to screw up too bad if you just keep that progression in mind.

I don't think law as a field is particularly hard with regard to the stuff we're doing now, it's just a pain in the ass sometimes.

To answer your question, I doubt you are too stupid. Why? You are coping just fine in your other core classes. Often, the ease of a class is determined by the effectiveness of your professor. For instance, my contracts professor is awesome; thus, I find contracts engaging and easier to follow (hard topics, but he makes them understandable). My Civ Pro professor is good, and as you might guess, I find Civ Pro to be my second easiest class. From a stereotypical standpoint, the two classes I called easier (note, I never said they were easy), are the "hard" 1L classes.

Anyways, many consider torts to be one of the easier 1L courses. For me, torts is by far my hardest class. Why? The professor is unclear, gives us rules that differ from most supplements I use (only class I use supplements for rules/etc...other class supplements are mainly for Q&A). Furthermore, most of the class is confused on the rules when the professor covers them.


To make a long story short, struggling in one class does not mean you are dumb. You made it into your law school. You are smart enough to succeed at your law school.

seespotrun wrote:

booyakasha wrote:Get Glannon.

This is the only credited response.

I've actually found Glannon to be dated. Though, we've only really covered pleadings thus far, so maybe the rest of the book is fine, but I've found it kind of frustrating so far. Glannon refers to the Conley "no-set-of-facts" standard as well as an outdated rule 15 over and over.

Is there anything like Glannon, but more recent?

Whatisthis wrote:

seespotrun wrote:

booyakasha wrote:Get Glannon.

This is the only credited response.

I've actually found Glannon to be dated. Though, we've only really covered pleadings thus far, so maybe the rest of the book is fine, but I've found it kind of frustrating so far. Glannon refers to the Conley "no-set-of-facts" standard as well as an outdated rule 15 over and over.

Is there anything like Glannon, but more recent?

Are you talking about the E&E? Do you have the most recent edition?